Measures B, C, D & E
Offer Revenue Alternatives

With just three weeks until the November 8 Special Election, voters will soon be showered with TV commercials, mailers and phone calls on the statewide ballot propositions 73 through 80. Closer to home are Orange County’s own ballot measures B through E which will have a major impact on OC public safety financing.

Measures B, C, D and E all deal with the County’s share of the half-cent public safety sales tax, passed by California voters in 1993 as Proposition 172. Current law gives the Board of Supervisors sole authority to disburse these funds for public safety purposes, which amounted to $259 million in 2004-05.

For the past twelve years, the Board has allocated the Proposition 172 funds as follows: 80% for the Sheriff’s Dept. and 20% for the District Attorney. Let’s look at how this might change:

MEASURE B / STATUS QUO: Measure B reaffirms the role of the Board of Supervisors in annually disbursing Prop. 172 sales tax revenues. It further restricts their use only to public safety agencies administered by the County of Orange. Special districts would not qualify.

MEASURE C / EQUIPMENT FUND: Measure C diverts $10 million of the Prop. 172 sales tax revenues to a newly created capital equipment fund. Any public safety agency in Orange County (including the Sheriff and D.A.) could apply for these funds, with the Board of Supervisors deciding on the annual allocation.

MEASURE D / FIRE AUTHORITY DIVERSION: Measure D would ultimately divert 10% of OC’s share of the Prop. 172 sales tax revenues from the Sheriff and D.A. to the Orange County Fire Authority. The diversions would be phased in based on a growth formula. The OCFA is a special fire district, serving 43% of the county. The Auditor-Controller estimates this diversion would total $34 million annually by 2010, funds that would have to be made up by cutting back county services.

MEASURE E / PROBATION: Measure E allocates 5% of the County’s share of Prop. 172 sales tax revenues for the OC Probation Dept. Revenues lost to the Sheriff and D.A. would have to be addressed by the Board.

OC voters are free to vote for any or all of the above measure, or vote “no” on all of them, as well. Should more than one measure receive a majority of the vote, that with the highest total would win.

Election Deluge for OC Registrar

From October ’05 through November ’06, Orange County may have to conduct a total of seven separate elections. That’s an average of one election every 22 days for OC Registrar Neal Kelley.

A typical election cycle involves a Primary and General Election every two years. Odd-numbered years normally have no elections at all. This election season, however, is hardly normal. In addition to the Special Election called by the Governor this November 8, there is a special election for a Congressional seat (recently vacated by Chris Cox) and a possible 35th State Senate District Special Election, as well as the 2006 June Primary and November General Election.

The 48th Congressional Election was held October 4, with the run-off set for December 6. If top vote getter John Campbell wins, the Governor would call another special election to fill his State Senate seat, requiring both a primary and run-off election. It is unclear whether this could or would be tied to the June Primary.

This spate of elections is partly due to the unusual circumstances of a midterm Congressional resignation (Cox’s) and this November’s Special Election for Props 70-84. Expect more special elections, however, as termed-out officeholders scramble for new positions and political longevity. More reasonable term limits (say, 12 years for any office) would limit this ongoing political musical chairs.

FPPC Agreement Reached

My former treasurer and I reached an agreement last month with the California Fair Political Practice Commission regarding 2001 campaign reports. The FPPC claims that certain contributors’ occupation and employer information was missing on campaign reports four years ago. All of this information, however was provided on subsequent amendments, and filed with the FPPC before the March 2002 election.

Originally, the FPPC had requested that 98 checks totaling $27,750 be refunded, but then agreed to a compromise. Under the agreement, no checks were refunded, and a $10,000 penalty was paid last month. The FPPC stipulation admits that “the 60-day return law was a relatively new one that took effect in 2001, and Respondents attempted to cure the disclosure violations by obtaining missing contributor information and filing amended campaign statements before the election”.

During the early weeks of my supervisorial campaign, we were blessed by an unprecedented number of contributions. My volunteer treasurer, Mike DiCostanzo, spent long hours after work on his home computer filling out lengthy forms and processing checks. We ultimately received over 2,000 total contributions.

Both Mike and I spent many hours personally tracking down contributors for occupation and employer information. Many turned out to be retirees with neither occupations nor employers. The 98 checks in question represented less than 5% of the total contributions.

COMMISSION OPENINGS: Those residents of the Fourth District (Anaheim, Placentia, Fullerton, Buena Park and La Habra) interested in serving on either the Veterans Advisory Council or the Senior Citizen Advisory Council should call my office at 714-834-3440. There position on Veterans Council is currently vacant, and applicants must be veterans of any branch of the U.S. military. The Senior Council position becomes vacant at the end of December, and applicants must be at least 65 years of age.